Gasoline is cheaper these days!

[Skookum]

Speaking of sitting at home.... the retiree population is larger than ever.

Guess who's collecting "benefits" ?

 

[Babe2201]

I definitely don't think most people are sitting at home collecting supposed "benefits". Some do, but the vast majority of people in this country work and it's a labor statistic that is monitored, it's called employment participation. You might also want to check your "benefits" claims by looking at what benefits are being collected. Believing there is a labor shortage just because sitting at home collecting benefits right now is a really negative, pessimistic, and quite frankly, uninformed point of view.

Ok so the next time a business has an unscheduled shut down or tells me they have positions to fill I will just say I don't understand because the great Skookum told me there is not a labor shortage.

 

[Skookum]

Ok so the next time a business has an unscheduled shut down or tells me they have positions to fill I will just say I don't understand because the great Skookum told me there is not a labor shortage.

Your eyes deceive you again. I did not say that. There are labor shortages in some sectors of the economy, for sure. And it's because unemployment is very low and participation is high. There are more jobs than available workers. See also, wage growth over the last couple of years.

There are job openings that can't be filled where I work, too.

Did they have to do that 5 years ago?

No, because unemployment was higher

 

[Oldgator73]

Ok so the next time a business has an unscheduled shut down or tells me they have positions to fill I will just say I don't understand because the great Skookum told me there is not a labor shortage.

Wouldn’t it be conceivable a labor shortage exists because there is 3.2% unemployment? It would seem the jobs that are open, the ones where these shortages exist, are the jobs nobody wants?

 

[Onyrlef]

It's not a theory. Every administration bends the numbers to make themselves look as good as possible. I know nothing of Area 52 other than what I've rad over the past 50 years. And that they test new military aircraft there out of sight of the general public.

3+2=5 isn't a theory not because I think it's otherwise but because 5-2=3 and 5-3=2. Every administration bends the numbers to make themselves look good isn't a theory because........fill in the blank________

 

[Tulecreeper]

3+2=5 isn't a theory not because I think it's otherwise but because 5-2=3 and 5-3=2. Every administration bends the numbers to make themselves look good isn't a theory because........fill in the blank________

OK, you lost me there.

 

[Tulecreeper]

Wouldn’t it be conceivable a labor shortage exists because there is 3.2% unemployment? It would seem the jobs that are open, the ones where these shortages exist, are the jobs nobody wants?

See, I don't understand that mindset. When I was younger and needed to work, it mattered not whether or not I wanted the job. If I needed income and couldn't get a job that I desired, I took any job I could because the other option was unemployment/welfare and that was not an acceptable alternative. As a matter of fact, there were a couple times I took two of those undesired jobs because one wasn't paying enough. Luckily, those days were few, and many many years ago.

 

[Skookum]

It's not a mindset. In recent times there have been more available jobs than actual workers looking for jobs. However, consider an unemployed program manager with 20 years career experience isn't going to suddenly become a plumbing apprentice because "they need the money". The wages wouldn't stop the house going into foreclosure anyhow. That program manager is trying to find a job in a similar space at a similar salary to what he earned before, and in this economy, he's likely to get that.

And the basic premise is true...if you have a choice between making $17/hr at Burger King, or $21/hr plus some valuable perks at another place, which one do you think a worker is going to choose?

 

[Tulecreeper]

It's not a mindset. In recent times there have been more available jobs than actual workers looking for jobs. However, consider an unemployed program manager with 20 years career experience isn't going to suddenly become a plumbing apprentice because "they need the money". The wages wouldn't stop the house going into foreclosure anyhow. That program manager is trying to find a job in a similar space at a similar salary to what he earned before, and in this economy, he's likely to get that.

And the basic premise is true...if you have a choice between making $17/hr at Burger King, or $21/hr plus some valuable perks at another place, which one do you think a worker is going to choose?

It is absolutely a mindset. If I have the choice of $17/hr at Burger King (which is ludicrous in itself), and no job at all while going on unemployment, I'm taking the $17/hr job no matter if I have a degree (which I do) and I think I should be paid more. If there is nothing available in my area of expertise and I need money I'm taking the lower paying job. And it is of no matter that it won't stop the house going into foreclosure. No one will ever say I sat on my azz and just let it happen. It is absolutely a mindset.

That's like the kid with no experience in anything not taking a job flipping burgers because they are "holding out for a management position" because they have a degree in Business Management. I've actually seen that, by the way.

 

[Onyrlef]

See, I don't understand that mindset. When I was younger and needed to work, it mattered not whether or not I wanted the job. If I needed income and couldn't get a job that I desired, I took any job I could because the other option was unemployment/welfare and that was not an acceptable alternative. As a matter of fact, there were a couple times I took two of those undesired jobs because one wasn't paying enough. Luckily, those days were few, and many many years ago.

Some of that is occurring largely because both Millenials and Gen Z workers are rejecting the traditional two worker family philosophy of their parents, boomers and Gen x . Dump the extra vehicle, mortgage, etc. An economy dependent on the wage slave, two earner model is going to suffer some degree of shock when the kids flip it off.

 

[Skookum]

It is absolutely a mindset. If I have the choice of $17/hr at Burger King (which is ludicrous in itself), and no job at all while going on unemployment, I'm taking the $17/hr job no matter if I have a degree (which I do) and I think I should be paid more. If there is nothing available in my area of expertise and I need money I'm taking the lower paying job. And it is of no matter that it won't stop the house going into foreclosure. No one will ever say I sat on my azz and just let it happen. It is absolutely a mindset.

That's like the kid with no experience in anything not taking a job flipping burgers because they are "holding out for a management position" because they have a degree in Business Management. I've actually seen that, by the way.

The mindset is do what is necessary to support oneself, that piece I get. At some point it doesn't make sense to become under-employed and the effort is better focused at regaining employment in one's area of expertise.

What I'm saying is the current labor market supports the latter. Fewer workers than available jobs. Workers have choice. So some jobs will remain open.

In 2008-ish, that wasn't the case. You had mortgage brokers employed as landscapers because the number of jobs was much less than the number of people looking for work.

 

[Tulecreeper]

Some of that is occurring largely because both Millenials and Gen Z workers are rejecting the traditional two worker family philosophy of their parents, boomers and Gen x . Dump the extra vehicle, mortgage, etc. An economy dependent on the wage slave, two earner model is going to suffer some degree of shock when the kids flip it off.

And I fully understand that. That also means they are going to be worse off financially than those previous generations, and they will be the first generation(s) to be so. My mom and dad both worked when I was a kid during the 60's and 70's. They didn't need to both work as my dad's income was sufficient for our family. They did so because they wanted more income, and more toys, more and longer vacations, and more money put away for retirement. Both I and my wife worked, also. Not because we needed the money, but because we wanted a larger nest egg when we finally pulled the plug. And it worked for both my parents and us. While we have made a significant amount more than my parents did, neither they nor us had to go without after retirement. My wife and I have more now in retirement income alone than we ever did during our working careers.

 

[Skookum]

The argument that millennials live in their parents basements and are broke because they're too fragile for work and they'll never retire because they spend all their money on avocado toast and free-trade coffee is, well, getting old. And so are millennials. Kind of shocking...they're becoming more affluent than their same-age counterparts in prior generations.

Gen Z...well, I don't know. They're so screwed, for them, it's like trying to join in a game of Monopoly which is already over, for the most part. It will be interesting to see how they change our world.

 

[Joezeppy]

That's like the kid with no experience in anything not taking a job flipping burgers because they are "holding out for a management position" because they have a degree in Business Management. I've actually seen that, by the way.

 

[IBTripping]

The thing I can't understand is that there is still a labor shortage almost everywhere. Is this the percentage still collecting unemployment and other people staying at home are collecting something else? If unemployment is so low then why are most companies still hiring for a lot of open positions?

What a low unemployment rate means is that there are more jobs available than there are workers to fill those jobs. Pretty much anyone who wants a job has gotten a job. Of course there is always some churn with workers leaving a job and looking for another and they can be be picky which jobs they accept.

Our booming economy, has created more jobs than before the pandemic recession. But, it has not created more workers. In fact, many older Americans, boomers, decided to retire during the pandemic which made those workers unavailable which reduced the supply of workers.

 

[Onyrlef]

And I fully understand that. That also means they are going to be worse off financially than those previous generations, and they will be the first generation(s) to be so. My mom and dad both worked when I was a kid during the 60's and 70's. They didn't need to both work as my dad's income was sufficient for our family. They did so because they wanted more income, and more toys, more and longer vacations, and more money put away for retirement. Both I and my wife worked, also. Not because we needed the money, but because we wanted a larger nest egg when we finally pulled the plug. And it worked for both my parents and us. While we have made a significant amount more than my parents did, neither they nor us had to go without after retirement. My wife and I have more now in retirement income alone than we ever did during our working careers.

Worse off is relative, not having a motorhome, boat, cabin on the lake etc. isn't necessarily being worse off.
The cause for the Zulu war in S. Africa is a sine qua non example. When Gold was discovered in the hills there, the problem for the British mine owners was the whites in S. Africa were unwilling to do the hard labor in mining and the Zulu tribesman had no interest, hard labor or not, money was useless to them. The mine owners went to the British gov't. and convinced them to levy a tax on every Zulu village, which they could either pay or face imprisonment. In order to pay the tax they had to earn money and to earn money they'd have to work in the mines. If they didn't pay they'd be arrrested and put to work in the mines. A win-win for the mine owners.
The zulu tribesman were never worse off than than the white settlers because they didn't have money. They were in fact worse off when they had money.

 

[Tulecreeper]

Worse off is relative, not having a motorhome, boat, cabin on the lake etc. isn't necessarily being worse off.
The cause for the Zulu war in S. Africa is a sine qua non example. When Gold was discovered in the hills there, the problem for the British mine owners was the whites in S. Africa were unwilling to do the hard labor in mining and the Zulu tribesman had no interest, hard labor or not, money was useless to them. The mine owners went to the British gov't. and convinced them to levy a tax on every Zulu village, which they could either pay or face imprisonment. In order to pay the tax they had to earn money and to earn money they'd have to work in the mines. If they didn't pay they'd be arrrested and put to work in the mines. A win-win for the mine owners.
The zulu tribesman were never worse off than than the white settlers because they didn't have money. They were in fact worse off when they had money.

I'm not referring to tangible material objects like boats. I mean actual income and future security. A person who keeps bouncing from one job to the next, looking for more pay and a better "work/life" experience, while at the same time spending every last dime they do earn is simply spinning their wheel and not advancing in any direction. There is no focus on anything other than today.

 

[Skookum]

That's a very broad generalization, but also characteristic of young adults. Bouncing between jobs is even considered normal in career realms to some degree, as it's one of the few ways to gain a salary adjustment more than a few years of annual pittance raises in return for literally killing oneself at a job.

Young people do think about and experience life in the moment. The defined path of marrying someone and starting a family and purchasing a home is becoming less common, as is taking work less seriously. Young 20's are about experience and travel, and who can blame them. They're doing it in a prime time for health, virility, and while they have a lack of any real responsibility.

Homes are beyond expensive, cars are expensive, gas is expensive. Their experience of the family unit is a 50% chance of unhappiness, infidelity, divorce, making it look like a lost cause to "settle" so young. They see their parents unhappy and stressed out in their jobs, laid off from a career because a change in the breeze, and working their whole lives to not really have anything at the end, and that includes health. Politics are a joke, financial institutions can't be trusted, and neither can corporations.

This is not the 1960's, 70's, 80's, or 90's, in fact, it's nothing like even 20 years ago.

Why do we judge them instead of help them with the goals they are willing to set?

 

[Oldgator73]

I'm not referring to tangible material objects like boats. I mean actual income and future security. A person who keeps bouncing from one job to the next, looking for more pay and a better "work/life" experience, while at the same time spending every last dime they do earn is simply spinning their wheel and not advancing in any direction. There is no focus on anything other than today.

I can’t worry about what the generations behind me will do. Or better yet how they will do. My parents and my wife’s parents worked all their lives, retired with a small nest egg and did okay. I worked (military and federal civil service) and we are doing better than our parents did. Due to having to pick up and move every tow to three years my never established a career. We never purchased a house with any intent to live in it until it’s paid off. Our kids have much different fiscal goals; son is 100% disabled and according to the VA is unemployable. He gets $3700 a month from the VA which non taxable. He lives on the property we purchased in Virginia in a small cabin. He says he has no need for additional funds. Our daughter and her husband probably make $150,000 a year and live in a house we purchased across town from us and struggle to pay the rent each month because they are fiscally irresponsible. The rent is $900 a month for a 4b 2ba home. Other homes in the area rent for $1500+ a month. Our will stipulates that house and the property in Virginia will be paid off and the remainder of our money will be put in a trust for the grandkids and they will start receiving a stipend each year when they reach a certain age. A lot of folks make enough money to live on. The problem is they spend every dime on crap they don’t need.

 

[TheBar]

If you have children it's impossible to not worry about them. Because they live for the moment they put nothing back for the future. That is a recipe for disaster no matter how you look at it. In my latest will I set aside more inheritance for my youngest daughter because of her partial disability after a car wreck. She's barely able to keep the lights on every month. Then I find out she recently blew a $20K windfall on a vacation to "help her feel better about life". Now I question whether I should leave anything to my children.